The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
More fuel for the 'D800 as good as MF' fire
- Thread starter tashley
- Start date
jonoslack
Active member
Well, Bob - I seem to remember someone proving conclusively that nothing more than 6mp was relevant in a 35mm sensor because of the 'laws of physics'
The Nyquist factor is one thing - sampling rates is another.
I'm not suggesting that anyone is going to bust the laws of physics . . . just that things that seem to be insurmountable problems when looked at in one direction are often capable of being sidestepped when looking in another.
Clearly a 35mm sized sensor is not going to give the same 'feel' as an MF sensor (anymore than film gives the same 'feel' as digital) - on the other hand I would think that the resolution capable on the best FF sensors has certainly overtaken where MF was a few years ago.
I don't really have an opinion on the core of this discussion (I don't have experience of MF, so, unlike most of you who are only half blind (not having seen proper D800 images) . . I'm fully blind!).
Personally, I've long since got past the point where any of my good photographs are damaged by the quality of my equipment - and my indifferent photos can't possibly be rescued from their mediocrity either by better colour depth or more resolution.
tashley
Subscriber Member
Re: More file for the 'D800 as good as MF' fire
:salute:
Yup, my bad for misreading your post. I agree totally with you. It begs a lot of other questions about how you might want an image to render, what techniques you might use to impersonate one format with another, and what size sensor/film suits a particular photographer and job. I've always wanted to play with one of those huge Polaroid backs or, even better, get a sheet of 60x40 inside a room-sized camera obscura but I'm running four systems already!
:salute:
I doubt very much that the "look" of MFD will ever be achieved by 35mm so lets put that debate to bed.
However, I feel there is a bigger picture to all these high Mpix 35mm cameras that could seriously threaten a company like Phase/Leafs very future.
While I'm sure there are very large profit margins in MF backs, the number sold is relatively small and I would imagine Phase/Leaf being the "open system" gain much revenue from the system sales. EVERY user only buys one back but EVERY shooter buys multiple lenses and possibly camera bodies. If photographers like our very own Guy, Jack and the OP Tim, buy the high Mpix Nikon/Canon and it proves great for DSLR type of work the incentive to invest in the MF glass/cameras diminishes.
Initially, digital back sales may not be effected by these new cameras as many now use them with wide glass on tech cameras but how long before people are unable to justify the huge cost of the rest of the system. Take for example the SK 150mm LS. A pretty standard focal length lens that most photographers want in their bag but at nearly $5K its a bitter pill to swallow. This is not some exotic super telephoto but a standard short tele that just happens to have a shutter built in.
When do we as a business say I can get near that quality with a Nikon/Canon and is more economical to invest my money there?
The niche for MFD may have just got a bit smaller and that is bad news IMO!
However, I feel there is a bigger picture to all these high Mpix 35mm cameras that could seriously threaten a company like Phase/Leafs very future.
While I'm sure there are very large profit margins in MF backs, the number sold is relatively small and I would imagine Phase/Leaf being the "open system" gain much revenue from the system sales. EVERY user only buys one back but EVERY shooter buys multiple lenses and possibly camera bodies. If photographers like our very own Guy, Jack and the OP Tim, buy the high Mpix Nikon/Canon and it proves great for DSLR type of work the incentive to invest in the MF glass/cameras diminishes.
Initially, digital back sales may not be effected by these new cameras as many now use them with wide glass on tech cameras but how long before people are unable to justify the huge cost of the rest of the system. Take for example the SK 150mm LS. A pretty standard focal length lens that most photographers want in their bag but at nearly $5K its a bitter pill to swallow. This is not some exotic super telephoto but a standard short tele that just happens to have a shutter built in.
When do we as a business say I can get near that quality with a Nikon/Canon and is more economical to invest my money there?
The niche for MFD may have just got a bit smaller and that is bad news IMO!
Last edited:
tashley
Subscriber Member
whilst I think that's true I also think that they need to look at closing the gap in the areas they lag. I don't want an IQ100 but I do want a DF body replacement with a civilised shutter, better AF, fewer glitches and lock-ups etc... And I'd also like proper live view for focussing on tech cams. I'm not alone, I know. There are also things that MFDB can do that SLR style cams generally can't (like movements on the back only, for flat stitches) and those are the core USPs and aren't dependant on no one playing sensor catchup.
tashley
Subscriber Member
Where are these 'indifferent' photos Jono? I sure ain't seen 'em!
johnnygoesdigital
New member
I think this thread has increased Nikon's sales for the D800 significantly, just based on the responses from most MFD users
A very impromptu method of gauging market share. Whilst most are not going to replace MFD with this camera, nor should they. I do believe it might be the S2 that it might be ultimately compared with. Yes, Leica is safe, it's a great camera, but as some here have pointed out, the uninitiated are most certainly going to give this camera a second look just based on investment. The form factor of the two are similar, and so is the MP, so this is a perfectly proper area to have this discussion. After three pages of responses perhaps it might be a little after the fact to move it now.
A very impromptu method of gauging market share. Whilst most are not going to replace MFD with this camera, nor should they. I do believe it might be the S2 that it might be ultimately compared with. Yes, Leica is safe, it's a great camera, but as some here have pointed out, the uninitiated are most certainly going to give this camera a second look just based on investment. The form factor of the two are similar, and so is the MP, so this is a perfectly proper area to have this discussion. After three pages of responses perhaps it might be a little after the fact to move it now.
Last edited:
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
jonoslack
Active member
Hah! you are too kind . . . Mediocrity is my Speciality!
Which is perhaps why I still don't seem to have a medium format camera?
Statistically insignificant. This amounts to an on-line focus group, and if you've ever observed focus groups, you'd know that what people say and what they do are two totally different matters.
Without a research moderator to control the interactive dynamics, it's even less than statistically insignificant.
PeterA
Well-known member
I use my MF backs on an Alpa or an Artec. I use an S2 like an SLR. At the moment I have an as new D3 sitting in its box with a bunch of equally boring Nikon lenses in their boxes. Happy to have the hassle of a tech camera to make tech camera shots.
@3k for a new body that provides the utility of this new generation camera is not a big deal in the scheme of things- maybe less than half the cost of one S2 lens so I might cough up for one.
People that use MF backs tend to understand what 35mm cameras are good for and what MF backs are good for.
The idea of one camera to do all things - exists only in the mind of people who dont really do much shooting as far as variety goes.
One thing that has become apparent over the years is that it is very easy to collect stuff - especially new fangled gee wizz stuff from 35mm land - these days pretty much any camera one purchases is very capable of making nice snaps. If you want something a bit better than a nice happy snap - well you need to put up with the hassle of MF etc.
one aside- if anyone thinks that a 35 megapixels on a 35mm sensor is going to be an easy camera to handhold and get decent results- you may be disappointed.
Pete
@3k for a new body that provides the utility of this new generation camera is not a big deal in the scheme of things- maybe less than half the cost of one S2 lens so I might cough up for one.
People that use MF backs tend to understand what 35mm cameras are good for and what MF backs are good for.
The idea of one camera to do all things - exists only in the mind of people who dont really do much shooting as far as variety goes.
One thing that has become apparent over the years is that it is very easy to collect stuff - especially new fangled gee wizz stuff from 35mm land - these days pretty much any camera one purchases is very capable of making nice snaps. If you want something a bit better than a nice happy snap - well you need to put up with the hassle of MF etc.
one aside- if anyone thinks that a 35 megapixels on a 35mm sensor is going to be an easy camera to handhold and get decent results- you may be disappointed.
Pete
Last edited:
Seriously folks you are missing a key point.
For those of us who do not have a regular exercise routine, shooting MF is the closest we get.
How can some lightweight D800 compare to a DF, a 75-150 and an IQ180? I might have to cut my gin consumption if I give that up.
NEVER I say! (well maybe never)
-bob
For those of us who do not have a regular exercise routine, shooting MF is the closest we get.
How can some lightweight D800 compare to a DF, a 75-150 and an IQ180? I might have to cut my gin consumption if I give that up.
NEVER I say! (well maybe never)
-bob
doug
Well-known member
Maybe 'cuz I'm getting old, maybe 'cuz of the BS program last month by a Canon Explorer of Light, I'm no longer impressed by celebrity endorsements. I've learned to trust my own eyes.
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
Hee Hee - my weapon of choice is the 5561SGT with cube. Combine that with the DF/IQ160/75-150, 28D, 35D, 55LS & 300 APO kit I wear on a belt along with grads and you'll get quite the workout. Mine's surgeon recommended so I'm ok with that!
Btw Bob, you should try 2xD3s, 14-24, 24-70, 70-200VR & 200-400VR in a kuboto bag and trying valiantly to convince the Lufthansa gate agent that the bag is light and only weighs 20lb. That was a groaner that even a couple of D800s wouldn't have changed!
No gin? Now we're talking heresy!!!! Noooooooo ....
johnnygoesdigital
New member
Marc,
I've edited my post and put a smiley face in so readers will understand the jest. The other part i'm sticking with
johnnygoesdigital
New member
Perhaps a poll should be taken to gauge how many MFD owners will add a D800 or potential MFD owners who will now purchase a D800 instead.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
This not-so-potential MFD owner will skip the D800 and spend the money on a Fuji GX680, some lenses and piles of b&w film of assorted speeds, grains and brands. Then, if there's any money left (as if there were any to start with ), he'll go to Tawan Dang at Pra Ram III with some friends and have a beer or five.
:: TAWANDANG MICROBREWERY ::
Both questions answered?
), he'll go to Tawan Dang at Pra Ram III with some friends and have a beer or five.:: TAWANDANG MICROBREWERY ::
Both questions answered?
That's the real potential impact of high-res 35mm cameras.
The MFD market is tiny. If they were animals they would be on the endangered list and close to the top.
What studio would look beyond the bottom line? which is not "is a D800 (or Canon whatever) as good as a MFD" the bottom line is "Is a D800 good enough".
Now people use analogies like high end cars or computer servers to illustrate why nothing can possibly affect the survival of the MFD survival, none of these analogies take into account how much more fragile the MFD model is and how much higher it is on the endangered list.
I dont think anyone would want the MFD to dissapear but they have to get cheaper and more realistic, they have to compete. The upward creep in prices by MFD companies is as harmful as the 35mm erosion.
An example of 'competing' would be when Phase released their new IQ backs...the price should have the same as the backs they currently offered not 10 or 15 grand more (e.g. IQ40 should have replaced P40)... Now the MFD suppliers would laugh at that idea but there you go- one step higher on the endangered list for you...